Monte Carlo simulations and option

pricing
by Bingqian Lu
Undergraduate Mathematics Department
Pennsylvania State University
University Park, PA 16802
Project Supervisor: Professor Anna Mazzucato
July, 2011

Abstract
Monte Carlo simulation is a legitimate and widely used technique for dealing
with uncertainty in many aspects of business operations. The purpose of
this report is to explore the application of this technique to the stock volality
and to test its accuracy by comparing the result computed by Monte Carlo
Estimate with the result of Black-Schole model and the Variance Reduction
by Antitheric Variattes. The mathematical computer softwear application
that we use to compute and test the relationship between the sample size
and the accuracy of Monte Carlo Simulation is itshapeMathematica. It also
provides numerical and geometrical evidence for our conclusion.

0.1

Introduction to Monte Carlo Simulaion

Monte Carlo Option Price is a method often used in Mathematical finance to calculate the value of an option with multiple sources of uncertainties and random features, such as changing interest rates, stock prices or
exchange rates, etc.. This method is called Monte Carlo simulation, naming
after the city of Monte Carlo, which is noted for its casinos. In my project, I
use Mathematica, a mathematics computer software, we can easily create
a sequence of random number indicating the uncertainties that we might
have for the stock prices for example.

0.2

Pricing Financial Options by Flipping a Coin

A distcrete model for change in price of a stock over a time interval [0,T] is

Sn+1 = Sn + Sn t + Sn n+1 t,
S0 = s
(1)
where Sn = Stn is the stock price at time tn = nt, n = 0, 1, ..., N 1, t =
T /N , is the annual growth rate of the stock, and is a measure of the
stocks annual price volatility or tendency to fluctuate. Highly volatile stocks
have large values of . Each term in sequence 1 , 2 ... takes on the value
of 1 or -1 depending on the outcoming value of a coin tossing experiment,
heads or tails respectively. In other words, for each n=1,2,...
(
1 with probability = 1/2
n =
(2)
1 with probability = 1/2
By using Mathematica, it is very easy to create a sequence of random number. With this sequence, the equation (1) can then be used to simulate
a sample path or trajectory of stock prices, {s, S1 , S2 , ..., SN }. For our
purpose here, it has been shown as a relatively accurate method of pricing
options and very useful for options that depend on paths.

0.3
0.3.1

Proof of highly volatile stocks have large values for

= 0.01

Let us simulate several sample trajectories of (1) for the following parameter
values and plot the trajectoris: = 0.12, = 0.01, T = 1, s = $40, N = 254.
The following figures are the graphs that we got for = 0.01 Since we
have to be the value generated by flipping a coin, it gives us arbitrary values
and thus, we have different graphs for parameter = 0.01, = 0.12, T =
1, s = $40, N = 254
This is another possibile graph.
1

Figure 1: Let M be the value of S254 of different trajectories, k is the number

of trajectories

0.3.2

= 0.7

Then we repeated the experiment using the value of = 0.7 for the volality
and other parameters remain the same.
Similarly, it should have a number of different graphs due to the arbitrary
value of we generated by Mathematica. The following figures are the
graphs that we got for = 0.7
Conclusion: From the two experiments above with the large different
and constant other parameters, we can tell that the larger the , the
greater degree of variability in their behavior forthe s it is permissible
to use random number generator that creates normally distributed random
numbers with mean zero and variance one. Recall that the standard normal
distribution has the bell-shape with a standard deviation of 1.0 and standard
normal random variable has a mean of zero.

0.4

Monte Carlo Method vs. Black-Scholes Model

0.4.1

Monte Carlo Method and its computing

Monte Carlo Method

In the formular (1), the random terms Sn n+1 t on the right-hand side
can be consider as shocks or distrubances that model functuations in the
stock price. After repeatedly simulating stock price trajectories, as we did
in the previous chapter, and computing appropriate averages, it is possible
to obtain estimates of the price of a European call option, a type of

45

44

43

42

41

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Figure 2: S254 = 45.415, = 0.01

financial derivative. A statistical simulation algorithm of this type is what
we known as Monte Carlo method
A European call option is a contract between two parties, a holder and a
writer, whereby, for a premium paid to the writer, the holder can purchase
the stock at a future date T (the expiration date) at a price K (the strike
price) agreed upon in the contract. If the buyer elect to exercise the option
on the expiration date, the writer is obligated to sell the inderlying stock
to the buyer at the price K, the strike price. Thus, the option has a payoff
function
f (S) = max(S K, 0)
(3)
where S = S(T ) is the price of the underlying stock at the time T when
the option expires. This equation (3) produces one possible option value at
expiration and after computing this thousands of times in order to obtain a
feel for the possible error in estimating the price. Equation(3) is also known
as the value of the option at time T since if S(T ) > K, the holder can purchase, at price K, stock with market value S(T) and thereby make a profit
equal toS(T ) K not counting the option premium. However, on the other
hand, if S(T ) < K, the holder will simply let the option expire since there
would be no reason to purchase stock at a price that exceeds the market
value.
In other words, the option valuation problem is determine the correct
and fair price of the option at the time that the holder and writer enter
into the contract. In order to estimate the price call of a call option using a
Monte Carlo method, an ensemble
n
o
(k)
(4)
SN = S (k) (T ), k = 1, ...M
3

45

44

43

42

41

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Figure 3: S254 =45.1316, = 0.01

of M stock orices at expiration is generated using the difference equation

(k)
(k)
(k)
S0 = s
(5)
Sn+1 = Sn(k) + rSn(k) t + Sn(k) n+1 t,
Equation (5) is identical to equation (1) for eachk = 1, ..., M , except the
growth rate is replaces by the annual interest r that it costs the writer
to borrow money.
Option pricingotheory requires that the average value of
n
(k)
the payoffs f (SN 0, k = 1, ..., M be equal to the compounded total return

obtained by investing the option premium, C(s),

at rate r over the life of
option,
M
1 X
(k)

f (sN ) = (1 + rt)N C(s).

(6)
M
k=1

Solving(6) for C(s)

yields the Monte Carlo estimate
)
(
M
X
1
(k)

f (sN )
C(s)
= (1 + rt)N
M

(7)

k=1

for the option price. So, the Monte Carlo estimateC(s)

is the present value
of the average of the payoffs computed using rules of compound interest.

0.4.2

Computing Monte Carlo Estimate

We use equation (7) to compute a Monte Carlo estimate of the value of a five
5
month call option, in other word T = 12
years, for the following parameter
values: r = 0.06, = 0.2, N = 254, andK = $50. N is the number of times
of steps for each trajectories.

45

44

43

42

41

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Figure 4: S254 =45.1881, = 0.01

0.5

Comparing to the Exact Black-Scholes Formular

Monte Carlo has been used to price standard European options, but as
we known that Black-Scholes model is the correct method of pricing these
options, so it is not necessary to use Monte Carlo simulation.
Here is the formular for exact Black-Scholes model:

s
K
d1
C(s) = erf c( ) erT erf c(f racd2 2)
(8)
2
2
2
where

s
2
1
d1 = [ln( ) + (r + )T ], d2 = d1 T
k
2
T
and erfc(x) is the complementary error function,
Z
2
2
erf c(x) =
et dt
x

(9)

(10)

Now we insert all data we have to the Black-Schole formula to check the
accuracy of our results by comparing the Monte Carlo approximation with
the value computed from exact Black-Schole formula. We generated BlackScholes Model with parameterr = 0.06, = 0.2, K = $50, k = 1, ..., M (whereT =
N t), N = 200. And we got: C(40) = 1.01189, C(45) = 2.71716 and C(50) =
5.49477. The error of the Monte Carlo Estimate seems to be very large.
Thus we repeat the previous procedure and increased our sample size (M)
to 50,000 and 100,000. Then, I made a chart to check if the accuracy of
Monte Carlo Simulation increases by the increasing of the sample size.

45

44

43

42

41

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Figure 5: S254 =45.5859, = 0.01

Comparison of the accuracy of the Monte Carlo Estimate to the BlackSchole Model

MCE(1,000)

C(40)
= 1.67263

C(45) = 4.6343

C(50)
= 8.1409

MCE (10,000)

C(40)
= 1.61767

C(45) = 4.24609

C(50)
= 7.92441

MCE (50,000)

C(40)
= 1.76289

C(45) = 4.3014

C(50)
= 7.7889

MCE (100,000)

C(40)
= 1.7496

C(45) = 4.2097

C(50)
= 7.6864

Black-Schole Model
BS(40) = 1.71179
BS(45) = 4.11716
BS(50) = 7.49477

By the comparing Monte Carlo Estimate and the Black-Schole modle, we

can tell quite easily that the error gets smaller as the sample size increases.
Here we calculated the relative error by the equation
M onteCarloEstimate Black Scholemodle
Black ScholeM odle

(11)

The results are

error(1,000)
E(40) = 0.60593
E(45) = 0.32330
E(50) = 0.24272

error (10,000)
E(40) = 0.30232
E(45) = 0.19466
E(50) = 0.07819

error(50,000)
E(40) = 0.14037
E(45) = 0.13862
E(50) = 0.05254

error (100,000)
E(40) = 0.14037
E(45) = 0.08833
E(50) = 0.02157

Conclusion: Monte Carlo Simulation gives the option price is a sample

average, thus according to the most elementary principle of statistics, its
standard deviation is the standard deviation of the sample divided by the
square root of the sample size. So, the error reduces at the rate of 1 over
the square root of the sample size. To sum up, the accuracy of Monte Carlo
Simulation is increasing by increasing the size of the sample.
6

Black-Schole Model
BS(40) = 1.71179
BS(45) = 4.11716
BS(50) = 7.49477

Figure 6: replaced previous value of sigma with 0.7

0.6

Comparing to the Variance Reduction by Antitheric Variattes

Variance Reduction by Antithetic Variates is a simple and more

widely used way to increase the accuracy of the Monte Carlo Simulation. It
is the technique used in some certain situations with an additional increase
in computational complexity is the method of antithetic variates. In order
to achieve greater accuracy, one method of doing so is simple and automatically doubles the sample size with only a minimum increase in computational
time. This is called the antithetic variate method. Because we are generating obervations of a standard normal random variable which is distributed
with a mean of zero, a variance of 1.0 and symmetric, there is an equally
likely chance of having drawn the observed value times1. Thus, for each
arbitrary we draw, there should be an artificially observed companion observation of that can be legitimately created by us. This is the antithetic
variate.
For each k=1,...,M use the sequence
n
o
(k)
(k)
1 , ..., N 1

(12)

n
o
(k)
(k)
k+1
in equation (5) to simulate a payoff f (SN
)and also use the sequence 1 , ..., N 1
k
in equation (5) to simulate
an associated
n
o payoff f (SN ). Now the payoffs
k+
k
are simulated inpairs f (SN
), f (SN
) This is the Mathematica Program
that we ran to evaluate the Variance Reduction.
After comparing Monte Carlo Simulation with Variance Reduction by
Antithetic Variates, We made a table of data.

100

80

60

40

20

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Figure 7: S254 =47.084, = 0.7

k(1,000)
V (40) = 1.74309
V (45) = 4.4789
V (50) = 7.94642

k(5,000)
V (40) = 1.66685
V (45) = 4.305103
V (50) = 7.67707

k(50,000)
V (40) = 1.69966
V (45) = 4.1778
V (50) = 7.62341

k (100,000)
V (40) = 1.70674
V (45) = 4.099835
V (50) = 7.53716

While the table for the data of Monte Carlo Simulation we get under the
same condition is:
MCE(1,000)

C(40)
= 1.67263

C(45) = 4.6343

C(50)
= 8.1409

MCE (5,000)

C(40)
= 1.72486

C(45) = 4.34609

C(50)
= 7.92241

MCE (50,000)

C(40)
= 1.76289

C(45) = 4.3014

C(50)
= 7.7889

MCE (100,000)

C(40)
= 1.7496

C(45) = 4.2097

C(50)
= 7.6864

By the chart of Monte Carlo Estimate and the Variance Reduction by

Antithetic Variates, we can tell quite easily that the error gets smaller as the
sample size increases. Here we calculated the relative error by the equation
M onteCarloEstimate V arianceReductionbyAntitheticV ariates
(13)
V arianceReductionbyAntitheticV ariates
The results are
error(1,000)
E(40) = 0.0402
E(45) = 0.0347
E(50) = 0.0245

error (50,000)
E(40) = 0.0372
E(45) = 0.0296
E(50) = 0.0217

error (100,000)
E(40) = 0.0251
E(45) = 0.0268
E(50) = 0.0198

BS Model
BS(40) = 1.71179
BS(45) = 4.11716
BS(50) = 7.49477

70

60

50

40

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Figure 8: S254 =54.7495, = 0.7

0.7

Random Walk

Random Walk
ds = Sdt + S dw t

(14)

this is the random walk, where ds is S(tk +t)S(tk ), so this can be written
as

S(tk + t) S(tk ) = S(tk )t + S(tk ) k t

(15)
We randomly picked two different positive numbers, one greater than 1 and
one less than one. as 0.5 and 2 and we made mathematica ran twice
while keep every other variables constant. Here are some graphs that we
plot using Mathematica.
Figure 19 is a graph for = 0.5
In addition, we plot the graphs when = 2 as well. During Mathematicas computation, we got some values that are overflowing. Within the
values that are available, we plotted some corresponding graphs.
Figure 20 is a graph for the random walk when = 2.
By using 1000 as a sample size, we used the same program to compute

CM (10), CM (20), CM (40) and CM (160) when = 0.5, where CM (10) is

the Monte Carlo estimate for sample size 1000, CM (20) is the Monte Carlo
simulation for sample size 2000 ans so forth. We get CM (10) = 3.80332,
CM (20) = 4.75116, CM (40) = 6.09321 and CM (160) = 7.63962 . Now we
are using the equation
log2 (

CM (10) CM (20)
)
CM (40) CM (160)

(16)

50

40

30

20

10

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Figure 9: S254 =7.95396, = 0.7

to see the error. After plugging the numbers, we get this value of the equation to be -0.67621. This value is very close to 12 as desired.
By the same procedure, we used Mathematica to generate the value for
CM (10), CM (20), CM (40) and CM (160) when = 2. There are some overflow in the result which gives us trouble for going further and also tells us
that when > 1, there will be overflow.

10

40

35

30

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Figure 10: S254 =22.7805, = 0.7

Array of S for monte carlo estimate1.png

Figure 11: We first array for S in order to make space of memory for the

data we will get later. Here, P(k) is theC(k)

11

Mathematica program for Monte Carlo Estimate1.png

Figure 12: This is the Matehamatica program we made and data we got for
the different S(254), after 10 times of computing, named as M[k]=S[255, k]

in mathematica. Again, here P(k) is the C(k).

So, according to the data we
got, there are 10 different P[k+1], which in other word, 10 different Monte
+ 1) after 10 times of computing
Carlo estimate C(k

12

S(0)=40.png

Figure 13: This result is the Monte Carlo estimate corresponding to our
current stock prices of S(0) = s = 40 after using 254 steps (the number of
N) and M
= 10, 000 for each trajectories for each Monte Carlo estimate.

13

S(0)=45.png

Figure 14: This result is the Monte Carlo estimate corresponding to our
current stock prices of S(0) = s = 45 after using 254 steps (the number of
N) and M
= 10, 000 for each trajectories for each Monte Carlo estimate.

14

S(0)=50.png

Figure 15: This result is the Monte Carlo estimate corresponding to our
current stock prices of S(0) = s = 50 after using 254 steps (the number of
N) and M
= 10, 000 for each trajectories for each Monte Carlo estimate.

Figure 16: This the program we wrote with Mathematica for the Variance
Reduction by Antithetic Variattes. We have S for the positive and Y for
the negative and we get the average of these value by adding them up and
divide by 2.

15

Figure 17: This the program we wrote with Mathematica for different values
of .

46

45

44

43

42

41

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

Figure 18: This is the graph when = 0.5

16

1.0

46

45

44

43

42

41

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Figure 19: This is how the graph looks like when = 0.5

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

Figure 20: This is the graph when = 2

17

1.0

20

15

10

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

Figure 21: This is how the graph looks when = 2

18

1.0